PROPOSAL TYPE
Roundtable
SEEKING
- Seeking General Feedback and Interest
- Seeking Additional Presenters
RELATED TOPICS
- Archives
- Preservation
- Public Engagement
ABSTRACT
Local governments, tribes, nonprofits, and the public are increasingly asked to comment on federal activities under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. These undertakings have the potential to impact historic properties. The complexity of the projects and the regulatory process can make effective response challenging. Yet local participation is critical to positive preservation outcomes – particularly in historically marginalized communities. Public historians have enormous potential to influence this process. This session uses a conversational format and case studies to explain Section 106, benefits of participation, response strategies, and how to obtain consultation assistance.
DESCRIPTION
The goal of this presentation is to familiarize participants with Section 106 consultation, understand its importance, interest them in participating, and provide tools to do so effectively. For those already familiar with Section 106, the purpose is to share new approaches to consultation undertaken in real-world scenarios. Participants will learn from presenters and other audience members’ experiences.
Typically I make this presentation to historic preservation audiences, and want to ensure its relevance and readability for people engaged in other aspects of public history. I would like to hear whether people are interested in this topic, and if there is anything in the abstract that should be clarified or elaborated upon further. If it doesn’t interest you, I’d like to know why so that I can better frame my final proposal.
I am making a similar presentation at the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions’ 2022 FORUM with another speaker. To make this topic engaging, we are interviewing each other using pre-determined questions to draw out information on case studies conversationally. This will be interspersed with audience discussion and questions.
I would like to replicate this format at the NCPH Annual Meeting. I am interested in partnering with 1-2 people who have engaged in Section 106 consultation (ideally on behalf of a consulting party). If selected, we’d agree upon a short introduction to the topic and decide what case studies from our own experiences to discuss. We would write the questions another presenter will pose to us, and prep our answers to the degree we prefer. An accompanying PowerPoint will mostly feature images to illustrate these case studies. I am also open to tweaking this general format if you have a fresh idea!
If you have a direct offer of assistance, sensitive criticism, or wish to pass along someone’s contact information confidentially, please get in contact directly:Jacqueline Drayer, Mulberry History Advisors, [email protected]
ALL FEEDBACK AND OFFERS OF ASSISTANCE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED BY JULY 7, 2022. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
A working knowledge of the NRHP is absolutely critical to anyone entering the field of public history. This will be a good session and I can suggest some contacts that could be made through the Washington Office of the NPS. I organized a session in 2018 on “new perspectives for nominations” that went over really well in Las Vegas. My fellow presenters were from the Washington Office (who do regular training sessions) and the NR coordinator at Nevada SHPO. Your session as proposed is flexible and has great potential, especially if the session is interactive with the audience. I can volunteer to participate, or you could find someone closer to Atlanta, given the high likelihood of my having to pay for transportation there.
Stephen, thank you for this great feedback! I would love to discuss possible contacts or your own participation – you can reach me at [email protected]
I come from an architectural history/preservation background and want to make sure the session helps public historians who don’t frequently work with SHPOs and federal agencies understand why they should get involved in 106. If you know any public historians who’ve done so from outside the preservation world, I’m especially interested in including them. It’s great to hear that your preservation-focused session was well-received at a past NCPH conference.
The Southeast Region of the National Park Service is headquartered in Atlanta, where the meeting will take place. Stephen’s right about the Washington office, but section 106 coordinators in the parks work more closely with regional office folks than they do with those in Washington. I’m in the Midwest Region, not Southeast, so I’m not sure who’s looking after 106 there, but perhaps someone else does.